Mvrpc: Summary Of All The Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies In 1992, Federal Legislation (Public Law 102-419) established the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. Included in this legislation were provisions for an “inter-urban” rail connection to link the Wright Cycle Shop with the Huffman Prairie Flying Field. Since that time, a number of transportation studies have recommended various alternatives for effectively connecting the National Park sites and other tourist locations within the Miami Valley region. The first study was conducted in 1996 by Dr. Richard Henry. The Dayton National Park Railway Study was an outgrowth of his work on a select Transportation Subcommittee of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historic Park Committee that was established in 1995 to examine various transportation options for linking the various National Park Sites. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) earmark funding for a Major Investment Study (MIS) was made available in 1998. The Montgomery and Greene Counties Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor Study was conducted by Burgess & Niple and recommended further alternative evaluation for specific rail and bus alternatives. In 1999, an additional FTA earmark was secured for a second phase MIS for evaluation of the specific rail and bus alternatives. The Dayton Aviation Corridor Transit Study, performed by Parsons Brinckerhoff, recommended a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) which included a heritage rail system linking west Dayton to downtown and a broader bus transportation system linking residential and employment centers as well as tourist attractions between west Dayton and Greene County. After reviewing this study, the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (MVRPC) Steering Committee chose not make a recommendation as to whether the project should be placed on MVRPC’s Long Range Plan. In an effort to reach consensus, MVRPC and the Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority (GDRTA) agreed to work together in 2004 on a further study and validation of the Locally Preferred Alternative. This validation effort came in the form of a project with Stone Consulting who presented alternative downtown routings and cost estimates for the heritage rail system. In addition, the MVRPC staff, in cooperation with other entities, conducted a ridership survey. After these initiatives were completed, GEM Puiblic Sector Services performed an economic impact analysis of the revised heritage rail system proposal. This report will provide a review of each of the aforementioned studies and provide an outline for the steps necessary in order to reach a consensus on a Locally Preferred Alternative for the Miami Valley Region.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 1 10/3/2007

Dayton National Park Railway Study The first study conducted was the Dayton National Park Railway Study, performed by Dr. Richard Henry, a member of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Park Commission. This Commission formed a Transportation Sub-committee that was tasked with evaluating alternatives for connecting the various sites of the National Park in Dayton. Specifically, this study was designed to evaluate an electric “inter-urban” rail line betweem the Wright Cycle Shop and the Huffman Prairie Flying Field. In addition to connecting the National Park sites, the objective of this study was to promote economic development in the Miami Valley region and specifically, in Dayton’s Central Business District. The full study report is considered a part of this document as Attachment A – The Dayton National Park Railway Study. This report can be found online at: http://docs.mvrpc.org/dahc/Henry_Study.pdf This study recommended the following routes: Baseline East Phase: Downtown Dayton to the Air Force Museum The Baseline-East phase will provide passenger rail service between the Dayton CBD and the United States Air Force Museum. From the eastern terminus of this phase, the rail route would proceed west to the B&O Railroad right-of-way presently owned by the Five Rivers MetroParks, and south along this right-of-way to the junction with the Conrail line, just northeast of the Smithville Road overpass bridge at US Route 35. From there, the line would proceed on the existing Conrail tracks to Dutoit Street, then west to Third Street and terminating at the Arcade. Baseline West Phase: Wright-Dunbar Neighborhood to Downtown Dayton The Baseline-West phase will provide service between Downtown Dayton and the Wright Dunbar Neighborhood making connections with the Paul Laurence Dunbar House, the Wright Cycle Shop and the National Park Visitors Center. This would be the second phase of the railway network to be constructed. It will utilize Third Street from Downtown at the Arcade across the Miami River to the CSX railline crossing just east of the Conover Street and West Third Street intersection. The route utilizes CSX right-ofway north to Rosedale Avenue. Huffman Prairie Branch: Air Force Museum to Huffman Prairie This branch would connect the Huffman Prairie to the US Air Force Museum and other National Park and Avaition Heritage sites. This branch would operate in the Springfield Street right-of-way east to a point just east of the Conrail overpass near State Route 444. From there, the route would follow Marl Road to the Wright Brothers replica hangar at the Huffman Prairie. Carillon Park Branch: Wright-Dunbar to Carillon Park This branch would provide a connection to Carillon Park from the Wright-Dunbar Neighborhood via the Edwin C. Moses right-of-way, south between Third Street and Stewart Street. The line would use Stewart Street to Patterson Boulevard and then south to Carillon Park. Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 2 10/3/2007

Trotwood Branch: Wright Dunbar to Trotwood The purpose of this line would be to provide system connections with the Wesleyan Nature Center and the Trotwood community. The route would connect at Rosedale Avenue and continue north over the City of Dayton’s Northwest Railroad to Olive Road in Trotwood. Fairborn Branch: Huffman Prairie to Fairborn This line would provide a system connection with the City of Fairborn in Greene County. This line would utilize SR 444 east to Fairborn. An alternate connection via the Cincinnati and Lake Erie right-of-way could be used for this connection. Kettering Branch: Downtown Dayton to Kettering This line would link the City of Kettering to the National Park Railway system. This branch would connect with the Baseline-East route at the Conrail/B&O intersection, and proceed south along the Conrail tracks to Dorothy Lane, Wilmington Pike and, eventually to Woodman Drive. Detailed descriptions of these routes can be found on pages 1-3 of the full report, as shown in Attachment A. The Baseline route as well as Huffman Prairie and Carillon Park branches are designed to provide tourist-based service to the various sites. Attendence estimates for the US Air Force Museum are nearly 1,000,000 visitors annually. The study notes that capturing some of these visitors for further tourist stops in the Dayton area could be a great benefit to the local economy. The Trotwood, Kettering and Fairborn branch lines are primarily developed to supply a commuter option for residents’ work trips as well as providing a link to food, lodging and other amenities for tourists. Construction cost estimates for the projects recommended in this study total $58.7 million (in 1995 dollars). This estimate includes all branches. A cost in the range of $38 to $40 million is estimated for the tourist branches only (East and West Baseline routes along with Huffman and Carillon branches). Phase

Construction Cost

Baseline - East Phase

$

12,119,660.61

Baseline - West Phase

$

6,971,942.33

Huffman Prarie Branch

$

7,848,244.86

Carrillon Park Branch

$

10,910,910.34

Trotwood Branch

$

2,615,107.10

Fairborn Branch

$

10,511,752.45

Kettering Branch

$

7,287,084.77

Electrified Freight Trackage Option

$

451,711.60

Total

$

58,716,414.06

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 3 10/3/2007

This financial model is based on qualifying for 80% federal funds and a 20% local match. The financial model is also based on a $5 all day pass for tourists and a $2 one-way fare, mainly aimed at commuters. Ridership estimates are based on three-quarters capacity, or 36 passengers per rail car. Cost to operate the system would be based on a $65.52/hour rate. Based on the ridership estimates shown in the study, there could be an operational surplus with passengers equalling 75% of train capacity. Scenario

Operating Expense

Income

Park Service Option (High Ridership level with transit passengers) Park Service Option (High ridership level park visitors only) Park Service Option (Low ridership level with transit Park Service Option (Low ridership level Park visitors only) Full System (High ridership level - with transit passengers) Full System (Low ridership level - with transit passengers)

$1,436,374

$2,096,224

Balance Profit (Subsidy) $659,850

$1,436,374

$1,789,216

$352,842

$1,436,374

$1,720,992

$284,618

$1,436,374

$1,496,786

$60,394

$2,306,658

$2,779,920

$473,262

$2,306,658

$2,169,948

($137,010)

More details regarding the financial information in this study can be found on pages 4-5 of the full report in Attachment A.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 4 10/3/2007

Montgomery and Greene Counties Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor Study In 1998, the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission selected the consulting firm of Burgess & Niple to perform a Major Investment Study (MIS) to evaluate transportation options to connect the various National Park sites. This study was led by an MVRPC-appointed Steering Committee representing local, state and federal transportation stakeholders. The full study report is considered a part of this document as Attachment B – The Montgomery and Greene Counties Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor Study. This study can be found online at: http://docs.mvrpc.org/dahc/BN_Study.pdf The study clearly defined the transportation problem to be resolved; dis-connected and separate locations of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historic Park have reduced the park’s potential for new attendence. The goals and objectives of the Montgomery and Greene Counties Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor Study were as follows: • • • • •

Provide a transportation linkage to all of the National Aviation Heritage Historic Park sites Maintain the historical and environmental integrity of the park sites Reinforce the role of downtown as the employment, commercial, entertainment and cultural center of the region Provide a transportation link between Sinclair Community College and Wright State University Improve workforce development and access

The defined study area for this effort included the Wright Cycle Shop and the Dunbar House State Memorial, just west of Downtown Dayton, as well as the Huffman Prairie Flying Field and the United States Air Force Museum. This study was the first to examine a full range of transportation needs between all of the the aviation heritage and park sites. This included an examination of various transportation mode options such as, the No-Build option, Transportation System Management (TSM), Heritage Rail Trolley and Electric Trolley Bus options. The alternatives were evaluated using specific evaluation criteria that included: • • • • • • • •

Attractiveness of mode to park visitors Service to Historic Park Sites Financial Feasibility Environmental Impacts Transportation Linkages Land Use Operating Efficiencies Cost Effectiveness

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 5 10/3/2007

Ridership projections were also generated for each of the individual passenger modes based on a specified fee structure. For buses, an estimated annual ridership of 130,000 trips were projected at a $2/day fee. This number was 70,000 at a $5/day fee. For an electric trolley bus, these numbers increased to an estimated 200,000 annual trips at $2/day and 110,000 at $5/day. The Heritage Rail mode had the highest estimated ridership with 280,000 annual trips at $2/day and 155,000 at $5/day. Three main routes were studied, all would utilize the Wright Dunbar connection route options through the Central Business District as indicated below: Wright Dunbar to Downtown Connection The western terminus of this route is located at the First Avenue railroad crossing and Third Street, in the Wright-Dunbar neighborhood. This line would either share the CSX rail right-ofway or a new parallel track would be constructed. Through the downtown area, the route could either utilize Third Street or follow one-way pairs on Fourth and Fifth Streets. A re-connection to Third Street would be made via Jefferson Street. A connection to Fifth Third Field would be made by turning north on Sears Avenue and then following the former Erie Railroad right-of-way between Monument Avenue and First Street. East of Downtown, three alternative rail routes were considered: The Eastwood Alternative To the east, this route would traverse Eastwood Park mainly utilizing existing railroad rights-of-way to Harshman Road, and then connecting to the US Air Force Museum via a structure parallel to Harshman or along the Conrail right-of-way and crossing Springfield Pike at the museum entrance. The Springfield Alternative This alternative would follow the most direct route to the US Air Force Museum operating along First Street and Springfield Pike, almost exclusively within street rights-of-way. The Conrail Alternative These rail rights-of-way have recently been acquired by the Norfolk Southern Railroad. The connection to Downtown routes would be made in the vicinity of Third and Keowee, very near Dutoit Street. From this location, the route would follow Conrail/Norfolk Southern rail rights-of-way to a point east of Smithville Road. From there, the route would follow a rail right-of-way abandoned by the B&O railroad. This property is presently owned by Five Rivers MetroParks and includes a recently constructed bicycle and pedestrian path. North of Airway Blvd., the route would leave rail rights-of-way and skirt along the edge of Wright Patterson Air Force Base to the US Air Force Museum entrance. Huffman Prairie Shuttle A US Air Force Museum to Huffman Prairie alignment would connect with any of the three existing alignments and utilize abandoned railroad rights-of-way along with that of State Route 444 and Marl Road to reach the Huffman Prairie. Alternatives Map Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 6 10/3/2007

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 7 10/3/2007

A conceptual level cost estimate was developed for each alternative. Capital costs ranged between $125 million and $141 million for each of the rail alternatives. Annual Operating Cost estimates were also projected for each in the range of $8-9 million. Alternatives Evaluation Matrix

Criteria

Bus (TSM)

Electric Bus (ETB)

Conrail Rail

Springfield Rail

Short (Dunbar House to AFM) Eastwood Springfield Rail Electric Bus Conrail Rail Rail

Ridership (Year 2025) Annual Increase In Transit trips Daily Rail Trips Service to Park Sites Travel Time Dunbar House to Air Force Museum (Wait + Ride) Transportation Linkages Zero Car Household Accesibility Index

.56 M

1.10 M

48 min.

35 min.

33 min

38 min.

32 min.

35 min.

33 min.

38 min.

441

447

448

453

446

445

446

451

Land Use Impacts

None

Supports

Supports

Supports

Supports

Supports

Supports

Supports

Cost Efficiency Operating Cost per Passenger Mile

$0.79

$0.84

$0.97

$0.99

$0.96

$0.85

$0.91

$0.93

Attractiveness of Mode Annual Tourism Ridership

.13 M

.20 M

.28 M

.28 M

.28 M

.20 M

.28 M

.28 M

Environmental Impacts Air Pollution reduction (Tons/year)

0.4

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.6

0.7

$4.2 M $3.0 M

$24.0 M $6.0 M

$135.4 M $8.8 M

$125.5 M $8.3 M

$140.7 M $8.6 M

$14.8 M $5.4 M

$79.4 M $7.5 M

$60.8 M $6.9 M

$1.03 $5.82

$2.20 $5.43

$9.11 $7.22

$9.78 $7.89

$12.33 $9.23

$1.50 $5.09

$5.36 $6.15

$4.99 $6.77

Financial Total Capital Costs Annual Operating Cost Increase Cost Effectivness Capital Costs per New Trip Operaing Costs per New Trip

1.22 M 5,200

1.05 M 4,100

.93 M 3,000

1.06 M

1.22 M 5,000

1.01 M 3,600

The MVRPC Steering Committee considered all of these alternatives, but did not arrive at consensus on a specific alternative to pursue. In absence of a clear-cut preference for an alternative, a consensus statement was developed and presented to MVRPC’s Transportation Committee as follows: A. The Steering Committee agrees to pursue a Heritage Rail Trolley system to link the park

sites, promote and serve tourism, and enhance local transportation service. B. The Steering Committee agrees to pursue detailed study of the rail system for the

purpose of making a decision to proceed with seeking planning, engineering and construction funding. C. The Steering Committee recommends creation of a Heritage Rail Trolley System Program Committee(s) to monitor the study and make final recommendations for implementation. In Fiscal Year 2000 Transportation Appropriations Act, the Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor received an additional federal earmark in the amount of $981,000. The study recognized the need for the Steering Committee to use these funds to support the work identified in the consensus statement. This led to a further study being commissioned by GDRTA.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 8 10/3/2007

The Dayton Aviation Corridor Transit Study This study, performed by Parsons Brinckerhoff, was commissioned by the Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority (GDRTA) in 2003. This effort began with a re-affirmation of the goals outlined in the most previous study (Montgomery and Greene Counties Dayton Aviation Heritage Corridor Study). The full study report is considered a part of this document as Attachment C – The Dayton Aviation Corridor Transit Study. This study can be found online at: http://docs.mvrpc.org/dahc/PB_Study.pdf The complete goals and objectives of this study are as follows: • • • • • • • • •

Provide a transportation linkage to all of the National Aviation Heritage Historic Park sites Maintain the historical and environmental integrity of the park sites Reinforce the role of downtown as the employment, commercial, entertainment and cultural center of the region Provide a transportation link between Sinclair Community College and Wright State University Improve workforce development and access Develop regional consensus and make a recommendation Identify what the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) defines as a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). Conceptualize an expanded streetcar system for the benefit of the overall Central Business District. Identify peer agency capital, operating costs and funding sources

The Dayton Aviation Corridor Transit Study examined three distinct modes and various alignments for the alternatives. The Study went through three distinct screening levels with the following criteria: • • • • • •

Consistency with Goals and Objectives Economic Development Environmental Impacts System Performance Cost Public Involvement

With each of the three screening levels, the criteria grew more speific. Level I Screening evaluated eight different alignments with various modes. From this screening, five of the eight alternatives advanced to Level II Screening, where capital and operating costs were incorporated. Level III incorporated more detailed ridership and cost forecasting as well as the economic development potential of each alternative. More detail relative to the alternatives studied are shown in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 of Attachment 3. Each of the alignments described utilize Third Street from Williams Avenue in the WrightDunbar Neighborhood through the Central Business District area. Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 9 10/3/2007

Third Street Alignment This alignment would use the Third Street and Airway Boulevard rights-of-way east of downtown. At Harshman Road the alignment turns north to Springfield Avenue and turns east to connect with the US Air Force Musem. A seperate alignment aimed at commuters would continue east of Harshman onto Colonel Glenn Highway, connecting with Wright State University and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Springfield Alignment This alignment follows Third Street east out of downtown and continues east on Airway Boulevard. The alignment turns north on Harshman Road and then east on Springfield Avenue. A shuttle bus to the Huffman Prairie utilizing Marl Road, State Route 444, Kauffman Avenue and Memorial Drive is also a part of this alternative. A commuter route alternative continues east on Colonel Glenn highway from Airway Boulevard to connect with Wright Patterson Air Force Base. The commuter route also includes a western extension on Third Street. Norfolk Southern/Xenia Branch Alignment This alignment connects with the existing Norfolk Southern railroad right-of-way near the intersection of Third Street and Keowee Street at Dutiot Street. From there, the route follows the rail right-of-way to a point east of Smithville Road and then north on the B&O rail right-ofway. The alignment would then continue north with new right-of-way along Glendean Avenue to Springfield Avenue, connecting with the US Air Force Museum just to the east. Carillon Park Extension A seasonal bus extension was considered to provide service to Carillon Park. This route connected with the base service route at the intersection of Edwin C. Moses Boulevard and Third Street. The route followed Edwin C. Moses Boulevard south to Stewart Avenue and utilizes Stewart east to Patterson Boulevard and then south to Carillon Park. Downtown Heritage Rail Alternative This route was studied to provide an attractive alternative for connections between the WrightDunbar neighborhood and Downtown. The western terminus of the route is at the Conover Street Park-and-Ride lot in the Wright-Dunbar neighborhood continuing south to Third Street and then east to St. Clair Street and then south to Fifth Street with a turn-around loop at the western edge of the Oregon Historical District. This study concluded by recommending an alternative that included the Heritage Rail component between the Wright-Dunbar neighborhood and the Oregon District, as well as bus service on the Third Street alignment, extending beyond the Huffman Prairie to Wright State University and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 10 10/3/2007

The recommended alternative also included a downtown circulator bus/tram route, similar in nature to existing GDRTA service for special events and a short service extension on east Third Street into the Huffman Historic District. The circulator route would utilize Patterson Boulevard, Monument Avenue and Main Street to travel north and cross the river. From there, the route travels west and south via Riverview Avenue and Edwin C. Moses Boulevard, again crossing the river back into downtown at Fifth Street and continuing east to Patterson Boulevard.

An estimate for construction of this system is $37 million. Operating costs were estimated at nearly $2.5 million/year, with about $500,000 yearly in fare box receipts. The report also noted several potential Federal , State and local funding sources including the FTA New Starts program, CM/AQ, ODOT TRAC, National Parks Systems programs as well as potential public/private opportunites with joint development of stations and the sale of naming and sponsorship rights.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 11 10/3/2007

Operating Costs Service Days Weekdays Monday- Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Total

Year Round 255 204 51 50 60 365

May-Sept 69

RevenueMiles

RevenueHours

15 17 101

Annual Service Levels Peak Vehicles

Estimated Annual Cost

Enhanced Bus with Heritage Rail Downtown Enhanced Bus - Long Peak Route Enhanced Bus - Short Off-Peak Route Heritage Rail Downtown Sub-Total

185,326 193,778 80,923 460,027

14,183 14,906 9,634 38,723

9 0 2 11

$ 1,180,615 $ 745,775 $ 584,256 $ 2,510,646

Existing Related Bus Route Modifications Elimination of Route 13 Route 1E: Eliminate Existing Route Route 1E: Extend 60-min Service to WSU Sub-Total

(87,675) (90,280) 50,057 (177,955)

(5,490) (8,134) 4,118 (13,623)

-2 -2 1 -4

$ (396,666) $ (494,727) $ 254,488 $ (636,905)

282,072

25,100

NA

$ 1,873,741

Total

Unit Costs RevenueMiles Peer Agency Unit Costs 1-Factor Unit Costs (a) % of Variable Costs (b) Enhanced Bus 3-Factor Model (c) Heritage Rail 3-Factor Model (c)

$

RevenueHours

Peak Vehicles

$

5.12 $ 21.0% 1.08 $

73.11 $ 49.3% 36.03 $

175,862 29.7% 52,221

$

1.08 $

36.03 $

75,000

a -- One factor costs represent the peer agencies' costs divided by a single service variable -- either revenue hours, revenue miles or peak vehicles.

b -- The "% of Variable Costs" represents the portion of sampled peer agencies' O&M costs that are attributable to each of these three variables. For example, 49.3% of peer agencies' O&M costs are attributable to revenue-hours, in the form of operator wages and benefits. c -- The three-factor model integrates all three variables into a single model, by taking their weighted average. Weighting is proportional to the percent of unit costs attributable to each service variable.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 12 10/3/2007

Construction Costs – Bus Mode Aug. 2003 Improvement Qty. Streetscaping from Perry Street to rail overpass at Webster Street (lump sum) 0 Resurfacing of Roadway on Wright State Campus (per lane foot) 9500 Traffic signal priority installation (per intersection) 8 Busway Improvement Subtotal

Improvement Cost $ $ 1,235,000 $ 720,000 $ 1,955,000

Transit Facilities Improvement New Vehicle Maintenance Facility (lump sum) Type A Station Type B Station Type C Station Type D Station Park-and-Ride surface parking (per parking space)

Qty. 0 5 0 2 0 0 Transit Facilties Subtotal

Improvement Cost $ $ 750,000 $ $ 500,000 $ $ $ 1,250,000

Rolling Stock Improvement Diesel Vehicles for Carillon Shuttle Heritage Diesel Bus for Tourist/Commuter Route w/2 spares

Qty. Improvement Cost 0 $ 11 $ 3,850,000 3,850,000 Rolling Stock Subtotal $

ESTIMATED SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $ Contingencies Arts-in-Transit 1% Construction 30% Utility Relocation 0% Desing and Engineering Fee 8% Program Management Fee 3% Construction Engineering and Inspectioin Fee 7% Contingencies Subtotal

7,055,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

70,550 2,116,500 564,400 211,650 493,850 3,456,950

TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT COST (Second Quarter 2003) $

10,511,950

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 13 10/3/2007

Construction Costs – Heritage Rail Mode Aug. 2003 DESCRIPTION General Requirements Guideways Street Running Track - Paved At - Grade Ballasted Trackbed Aerial Structure/Bridges Drainage Retained Cut and Fill Bridges Trackwork Street Modifications/Restoration Utility Modifications Stations All NA Station Station Parking Storage Yard and Maintenance Shop Vehicles Right of Way Alignment Stations (rot used) Bike and Fence Maintenance Yard and other Special Conditions Subtotal Construction Cost (Civil) Civil Contingency NA Subtotal Civil

General Requirements Signals and Train Control Traffic Signals Communications Traction Power Substations Single Track Catenary System Double Track Catenary System Fare Collection Subtotal Construction Cost (Systems) Systems Contingency NA Subtotal Systems Total Construction Cost Seond Quarter 2003 Estimated ROW Cost Project Implementation Art in Transit Engineering/CM/Admin Total Construction Cost Second Quarter 2003

Unit RF RF RF RF SF RF RF LS LS LS

Unit Cost

Qty 0%

Total Cost $14,905,013

0 0 0 0 0 0 ` ` 12800

$0

$8,251,900 $643,113 $100

EA EA STL LS EA

8 Variable 0 0 ` 3

LS LS LS LS

0 0 0 0

$0 $1,030,000 $850,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,251,900 $643,113 $1,280,000

$1,150,000 $0 $0 $1,030,000 $2,550,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,905,013 $4,471,504

30% 0%

$0 $19,376,517

RF LS RF FA RF STA STA

0% 3 ` 3

$2,739,000 $850,000 $50,000 $10,000

$0 $2,250,000 $50,000 $30,000

` 5500 0 0

$300,000 $238

$300,000 $1,309,000 $0 $0 $2,739,000

NA

15%

MI LS

0.00 0 1 17%

$250,000

6.16

$1,119,615

$410,850 $3,149,850 $22,526,367 $0 $0 $250,000 $3,829,482 $26,605,849

More details of this recommended alternative including capital and operating cost estimates as well as potential project funding sources can be found in Chapter 8 of Attachment C. An MVRPC Steering Committee was established to consider the recommended alternative and consider it for advancement into the MVRPC Long Range Plan. After extensive consideration of the recommended alternative, the Steering Committee decided to conduct further research into other active street car systems as well as their associated economic benefits. Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 14 10/3/2007

MVRPC/GDRTA Follow-Up Refinemets to the Dayton Aviation Heritage Street Car System In an effort to reach consensus on the recommended LPA to the Dayton Aviation Corridor Transit Study by Parsons Brinckerhoff, MVRPC and GDRTA agreed to work together on a study to provide further validation for this recommendations. The full study report is considered a part of this document as Attachment D. This study can be found online at: http://docs.mvrpc.org/dahc/Economic_Impact_Analysis.pdf These efforts were conducted in a series of distinct phases. First, Stone Consulting, Inc. was contracted to offer an analysis of the proposed street car system in downtown Dayton as well as a comparison of other existing and proposed systems in other areas. As a result of this study, previously identified routes were adjusted to create a downtown circulator and a connection eastward to the US Air Force Museum. Results from examining streetcar systems in other areas are also incorporated into these findings. The second part of this effort was conducted by Gem Public Sector Services, Inc. This study considered the economic impacts of one alternative, broken into three phases. The route and construction phasing information is shown below. The third portion of the study was a ridership survey conducted by MVRPC staff at various locations throughout the study area. The objective of these efforts were: • • •

To provide a transportation link to the existing park sites To provide circulation within the Central Business District To encourage local and area residents to use the system for entertainment and social purposes

An operational analysis of the downtown circulator route and its costs are as follows: Phase 1-A: US Air Force Museum to Downtown This 6.28 mile segment would be constructed first. This route begins at the entrance to the Air Foce Museum and crosses Springfield Street to link with an existing Rail right-of-way and turns westward. The route follows this rail right-of-way west, generally parallelling Springfield Avenue to a point near Stanley Avenue. The route will cross the City of Dayton City Garage facility property and connect with the intersection of North Keowee Street and East Monument Avenue. From there, the route follows Monument Street and terminates at Patterson Boulevard.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 15 10/3/2007

Phase 1-B: The Northern Route This route is 5.23 miles long and begins at the intersection of Monument Avenue and Patterson Boulevard. It follows the Monument Street right-of-way west, across the bridge to Riverview Avenue. The route will provide service to the Dayton Art Institute via Belmonte Park Drive and then follow Riverview Avenue south to Third Street, where it will travel west into the WrightDunbar neighborhood. This route would use North Broadway, West First Street and North Paul Laurence Dunbar Street rights-of-way to loop back to Third Street. The Third Street right-of-way will be utilized to travel eastward, over the river and through downtown to Main Street. The route travels south on Main Street, east on Fifth Street and north on Patterson Boulevard.

Phase 2: The Southern Route The Southern Route would be constructed last. From Third and Main, it would follow Main Street south. It would then utilize Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Warren Street and Brown Street rights-of-way south to Stewart Avenue and travel west across the river to Edwin C. Moses Boulevard. From there, it connects northward to Third. This route also includes a branch line connection from the intersection of Patterson Boulevard and Stewart Street south to Carillon Park.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 16 10/3/2007

Construction cost estimates for the alternative described in this study are approximately $60 million for the entire project. This alternative would cost an estimated $1.7 million annually to operate. Capital Construction Expenditures and Line Miles

Project Phases Phase 1-A Phase 1-B Phase 2 Total

Year

Capital Cost

Street Car Cost

2006 2008 2010

$20,369,114 $21,035,738 $18,564,181 $59,969,033

$2,550,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $5,550,000

-

Capital Expenditures (Adjusted) $17,819,114 $19,535,738 $17,064,181 $54,419,033

Net Capital Expenditure

Line Miles

$12,473,380 $13,675,017 $11,944,927 $38,093,323

6.28 5.40 4.58 16.26

According to this study, an operational shortfall of $244,000 or less would exist for the first four years of service if the system achieve 5,500 riders daily. After the first four years, an operational surplus could be achieved. This formula is also based on a $1.25/day fare for the first year, with annual increases of $0.05/year until reaching a fare of $1.45/day after the fourth year. More detailed information on the financial forecasting involved in this study can be found in Section V of Attachment D. Annual Operating Revenue, Total Cost, and Net Loss Projections Phase 1-A Phase 1-B Phase 2 Year Revenue Cost Cost Cost Total Cost $ 581,719 $801,618 $801,618 2007 $ 581,719 $825,667 $825,667 2008 $1,245,563 $842,180 $547,776 $1,389,956 2009 $1,245,563 $859,023 $564,209 $1,423,233 2010 $2,032,594 $876,204 $575,493 $337,863 $1,789,560 2011 $2,032,594 $893,728 $587,003 $347,999 $1,828,730 2012 $2,107,875 $911,603 $598,743 $354,959 $1,865,305 2013 $2,107,875 $929,835 $610,718 $362,058 $1,902,611 2014 $2,183,156 $948,431 $622,933 $369,299 $1,940,663 2015

Net Losses $(219,899) $(243,948) $(144,393) $(177,670) $243,033 $203,864 $242,570 $205,264 $242,493

In addition, this study analyzed a number of other streetcar operations in Kenosha, Wisconsin; Lowell, Massachusetts; New Orleans, Memphis and Tampa. Each of these systems shared several common attributes. They are as follows: • • • • • • •

Each had a clear vision of purpose for building the system Each project took a significant amount of time to complete with numerous obstacles and opponents There was no single owner or funding partner. Several agencies were involved Each system was developed to serve or complement existing development Steetcar became its own attraction, exceeding all original ridership projections New transit riders were attracted to the streetcar service None of the systems were able to cover operating costs strictly with fare revenue

More specific information on each cases study can be found in Section IV of Attachment D. Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 17 10/3/2007

MVRPC Ridership Survey As these study efforts were being conducted, MVRPC performed an extensive ridership survey based on the alternatives identified. This study was conducted at various locations during the Fall of 2004. Surveys were distributed at locations such as Fifth Third Field, RiverScape, The Dayton Art Institute, Carillon Park, the University of Dayton, Sinclair Community College, The Wright Cycle Company Building, Huffman Flying Field and the United States Air Force Museum. MVRPC received more than 1,000 responses. Results of this survey are as follows: How did you arrive? 78% Drove to the particular venue and parked their car 12% Walked or biked 4% Were dropped off 3% Arrived via RTA 3% Were part of a tour group How often do you use RTA service? 83% Never use RTA 12% Ride once monthly or less 2% Ride once a week on average 3% Ride more than once per week Have you ever ridden a historical electric street car? 53% Yes 47% No Assuming the same service destinations, do you prefer streetcar or bus? 86% Preferred Electric Streetcar 14% Preferred Bus If you prefer to ride a streetcar, why? 74% Nostalgic reasons 12% Convenience and Comfort 5% Speed of travel 9% Some other reason What fare are you willing to pay? 83% $1-$2 12% $2-$3 2% $3-$4 3% $4-$5 How long would you be willing to wait for a ride on the streetcar? 11% 5 minutes or less 51% Up to 10 minutes 26% Up to 20 minutes 6% Up to 30 minutes 1% More than 30 minutes 5% Would adapt to streetcar schedule Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 18 10/3/2007

Next Steps Gaining local consensus on a single, defined Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) is the critical base upon which the project can be advanced over subsequent years. Before any further project development on the proposed Heritage Rail system, it is essential that it be publicly endorsed by the Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority (GDRTA) and added into its own work program. This endorsement will be the signal that allows the project to move forward into the process of gaining consensus from the project Steering Committee and MVRPC Technical Advisory Committee. Both recommendations will be necessary in order to add the project to the current MVRPC Long Range Transportation Plan. In addition, research from other cities has indicated that chances for project success are higher when an individual or organization comes to the forefront and champions the project. Often, this is an influential and visible person or organization in the community that can bring resources and energy to the effort. For most heritage rail projects, a local transit authority is the logical agency with the resources, expertise and desire to bring the project into reality. After a public endorsement from GDRTA, the next step in the process is for the Steering Committee to review and recommend one clearly defined LPA. Once this is done, at least one public meeting is needed so that a proposed LPA can be subject to public view and scrutiny. If an LPA emerges and is supported through GDRTA and the public involvement process, it then can be submitted to MVRPC’s Technical Advisory Committee for their review and recommendation. After this is done, the project will ultimately be advanced to the MVRPC Board of Directors for their endorsement of the LPA. Once the MVRPC Board of Directors endorses the LPA, MVRPC can then proceed with a Long Range Transportation Plan Amendment, or if apporpriate, incorporate the LPA in the next LRTP cycle . Inclusion of the project in the Long Range Transportation Plan is a pre-requisite to Federal Transit Administration approval that a project is ready to advance to the next stage of development, Preliminary Engineering. As the project moves closer to implementation, it will be added to the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), at which point, specific capital funding will need to be identified. It should be noted that additional environmental, economic and ridership analysis will be required within the context of performing Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Impact Statement work. These work items are detailed in FTA’s project development guidance and necessary to satisfy federal program requirements. The graphic on the following page breaks down the above mentioned processes, step-by-step and shows which agency is reponsible for completing each step.

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 19 10/3/2007

Next Steps to Project Development Heritage Rail System Plan publicly endorsed by GDRTA, by Board Resolution, with them agreeing to take ownership of project (GDRTA Role)

Added to GDRTA’s Work Program and submitted to MVRPC (GDRTA Role)

MVRPC Public Participation Meeting for the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) including a Citizens Advisory Committee meeting (MVRPC Role)

MVRPC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) review and recommendation (MVRPC Role)

MVRPC Board of Directors LPA endorsement (MVRPC Role)

FTA New Start Approval (GDRTA Role)

MVRPC’s Steering Committee reviews and recommends one clearly defined Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) (MVRPC Role)

Initiate Long Range Transportation Plan Amendment process or incorporate in next LRTP update cycle (MVRPC Role)

Include into MVRPC Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as funding is approved (MVRPC Role)

Completion of Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Engineering (GDRTA Role)

Additional project development as funding becomes approved (GDRTA Role)

Summary of Dayton Aviation Heritage Streetcar Studies Page 20 10/3/2007